{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/5bb26c9287ef87811438a58b/6877f8a86fb6cef50fe8aabb?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Saurabh Vishnubhakat on the Constitutionality of the Appointment of PTAB Judges","description":"<p>In this episode, <a href=\"https://cardozo.yu.edu/directory/saurabh-vishnubhakat\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">Saurabh Vishnubhakat</a>, Professor of Law and Director of the Intellectual Property and Information Law Program at Cardozo School of Law, discusses his draft article \"<a href=\"https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3988952\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">Constitutional Structure in the Patent Office</a>.\" Vishnubhakat begins by explaining how the patent application or \"prosecution\" process works, how the Patent Office adjudication process is structures, and how Patent Office administrative law judges are appointed. He then explains why the appointment process creates a constitutional problem under the Appointment Clause, based on recent Supreme Court opinions. Finally, he explains how the problem could be solved, and why the solution might improve patent policy and the patent adjudication process. Vishnubhakat is on <a href=\"https://x.com/emptydoors\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">Twitter</a> and Bluesky.</p><p>This episode was hosted by&nbsp;<a href=\"http://law.uky.edu/directory/brian-l-frye\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">Brian L. Frye</a>, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at&nbsp;<a href=\"https://twitter.com/brianlfrye\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">@brianlfrye</a> and on Bluesky at <a href=\"https://bsky.app/profile/brianlfrye.bsky.social\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">@brianlfrye.bsky.social</a>.</p>","author_name":"CC0/Public Domain"}